Glenn MacInnes: So I think on an absolute basis, we’re in the quarter on noninterest-bearing 113, 114 and that will as a flow. I mean, like John said, we have some municipal funds that have come into additional transactional funds that come in. So I think we’ll probably end the year within that range given the puts and takes to you.
Steven Alexopoulos: Got it. Okay. So pretty flat from here. Okay. I’m curious on the deposit competition side, it seems like most banks were building liquidity this quarter and it’s really played out, right? We’re not seeing that as much for 3Q, so when you look at the competitive environment, is it easing a bit here in the third quarter?
John Ciulla: Yes, I don’t think the competition is easing. It may be because the Fed has paused, and it’s been such a big increase. The people who are rate sensitive given — and the banks wanting additional liquidity, that it was a perfect storm in 2Q. So I do think that the pressure on deposit pricing eases but I’m not sure, Steve. I don’t — I wouldn’t characterize it as the competition for deposits easing. So I think that’s kind of why you’re seeing most of the folks in the industry take a position that the increase in deposit costs kind of moderate but continue because obviously, we all think that deposits are the most valuable thing. And obviously, we’re relying and want to rely more on our relationships than just going out and chasing deposits for rate. But I think competition stays strong, but I think the pressure on pricing moderates.
Steven Alexopoulos: And then finally, on the regulatory front. So your period end assets are almost $75 billion, right? We’re all waiting for the new regulations for banks above $100 billion. And I know we need to wait for the details. But John, what’s your messaging internally at this point to the team? Are you looking at this saying, “Okay, we’re close enough, whatever comes out, we’re going to work to comply with it now.” Do you feel like you have the time to comply with what comes out, like how are you viewing it at this stage?
John Ciulla: It’s great. That’s a good question. I’ll reiterate a bit of what I said before and maybe add to it. So I’m really happy with our risk infrastructure. Our regulatory relationships right now are remaining strong. It’s always been a real focus of mine and of the team. As I mentioned earlier in response to another question, we’ve already complied with LCR. We obviously — we stress test internally even though we don’t have obligations to disclose externally. And so we feel like and with this merger that took us over $50 billion, we are on the path to height and standards already. So we’ve built the infrastructure, I think, to continue to comply and to continue to execute in whatever the regulatory framework is. So when people ask how much additional cost will it be and so on and so forth.
I think I feel really good about where we are from a people, a process and a system perspective. The real hit is going to be if there is one, what are the actual capital and liquidity requirements as we move forward. I think your point is a good one as we move from $75 billion to $80 billion to $85 billion we’re clearly going to have to comply and be ready for whatever is out there. We will likely when these new regulations are implemented and have an opportunity at a time to adopt. So we won’t rush. We’ll make sure we’re compliant, but we’ll get ourselves fully prepared. So the way I look at it is I don’t feel like we’re going to be blindsided and it’s going to slow us down significantly. They’ll be if there are additional capital and liquidity requirements, those will be what they’ll be.
